• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

According

Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
299
Reaction score
56
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
To liberals the song “Baby it’s cold outside” is offensive because it gives off a rape vibe but “Back that ass up” by Juvenile is totally fine. **Facepalm**
 
To liberals the song “Baby it’s cold outside” is offensive because it gives off a rape vibe but “Back that ass up” by Juvenile is totally fine. **Facepalm**

Cold outside isn’t offensive but it is pretty cringe worthy, it reminds me of “the implication”

 
To liberals the song “Baby it’s cold outside” is offensive because it gives off a rape vibe but “Back that ass up” by Juvenile is totally fine. **Facepalm**

Would you point me to something whereby someone who speaks for liberals have indicated their "total" approbation of the "Back That Ass Up?" I'm not aware of any such individual or organization having declared that song "totally fine."
 
Would you point me to something whereby someone who speaks for liberals have indicated their "total" approbation of the "Back That Ass Up?" I'm not aware of any such individual or organization having declared that song "totally fine."

LOL ... I hadn't even heard of the song. It's a song?
 
Would you point me to something whereby someone who speaks for liberals have indicated their "total" approbation of the "Back That Ass Up?" I'm not aware of any such individual or organization having declared that song "totally fine."

If you believe that discussion is the intent of the OP, you're wrong. The OP is "black people are bad and everyone lets them get away with it!"

It's a white victim thread.
 
Cold outside isn’t offensive but it is pretty cringe worthy, it reminds me of “the implication”



Best line: "She doesn't know if she wants to sleep with me, that's not the point".

:lol:
 
Cold outside isn’t offensive but it is pretty cringe worthy, it reminds me of “the implication”



I'm thinking that perhaps I bailed on that show too soon.
 
LOL ... I hadn't even heard of the song. It's a song?

Yes.





My Black friends who play it at their parties have the DJ play a quasi-instrumental version of the song that omits certain lyrics they find offensive and of which my friends are unwilling to be thought of as being indifferent.

Nearly all my Black friends are liberal/Democrats. It occurred to me that if they find unacceptable some of the sentiments in that song, what liberal spoke for and gave his/her approbation, on behalf of liberals in general, to that song's lyrics/themes. That's why I asked the OP-er to back up h is assertion about what liberals find "totally fine."
 
If you believe that discussion is the intent of the OP, you're wrong. The OP is "black people are bad and everyone lets them get away with it!"

It's a white victim thread.

Maybe so; maybe not. I know that responding to the OP with serious questions that entreat him/her to support the assertions he made makes clear their insipidity, or, if there is a cogent/sound argument to be made supporting the claim(s), it'll establish their legitimacy. Either way, the truth will out, regardless of the underlying motivations for the thread's creation.

I don't know anyone here, so I can't very well attest to what be a member's motivations and intentions. I can, however, raise very good arguments for/against the substantive assertions and positions I or others hold or oppose.
 
Maybe so; maybe not. I know that responding to the OP with serious questions that entreat him/her to support the assertions he made makes clear their insipidity, or, if there is a cogent/sound argument to be made supporting the claim(s), it'll establish their legitimacy. Either way, the truth will out, regardless of the underlying motivations for the thread's creation.

No maybe. Big picture it.

If you can't figure the motivation behind idiotic posts, work on that.
 
No maybe. Big picture it.

If you can't figure the motivation behind idiotic posts, work on that.

To be honest, I'm just not interested in sussing the motivations of total strangers. I am quite content to consider the rational adequacy and completeness of the ideas folks posit and opining based on my analysis thus of their ideas/assertions.
 
To be honest, I'm just not interested in sussing the motivations of total strangers. I am quite content to consider the rational adequacy and completeness of the ideas folks posit and opining based on my analysis thus of their ideas/assertions.

I think you tried to direct the thread towards criticism of the booty song in support of the OP.
 
I think you tried to direct the thread towards criticism of the booty song in support of the OP.

To the extent you think so, you're mistaken. I think the OP-er's assertions are absurd. My post bids him/her to defend his or her absurd remark, or revise/recant it.

Because of, among other things, my days as a high school collegiate forensic debater, I'm more a rhetorical chess player. Thus I don't care why my opponent makes a stupid/benighted remark; I'm merely going to force them to look increasingly stupid/ignorant by pressing them into a position where they must defend their stupid remark/point or lose it by not defending it. As you may know, there's no way to successfully defend a senseless point/claim -- the only thing one can do with such a point is dig one's "hole" even deeper -- and that point which one cannot defend with germane facts is that which one loses. (It's more expensive to defend an indefensible (unsound/uncogent) point than it is to proffer a weaker point that is sound/cogent and can thus withstand rigorous scrutiny.)
 
To the extent you think so, you're mistaken. I think the OP-er's assertions are absurd. My post bids him/her to defend his or her absurd remark, or revise/recant it.

Because of, among other things, my days as a high school collegiate forensic debater, I'm more a rhetorical chess player. Thus I don't care why my opponent makes a stupid/benighted remark; I'm merely going to force them to look increasingly stupid/ignorant by pressing them into a position where they must defend their stupid remark/point or lose it by not defending it. As you may know, there's no way to successfully defend a senseless point/claim -- the only thing one can do with such a point is dig one's "hole" even deeper -- and that point which one cannot defend with germane facts is that which one loses. (It's more expensive to defend an indefensible (unsound/uncogent) point than it is to proffer a weaker point that is sound/cogent and can thus withstand rigorous scrutiny.)

You failed to address his premise (race) and sought to become lost in criticism of a booty song. That's assisting the OP in his endeavor, which you still refuse to recognize.
 
You failed to address his premise (race) and sought to become lost in criticism of a booty song. That's assisting the OP in his endeavor, which you still refuse to recognize.

Show me where, in response to the OP-er, I criticized the "Booty" song.
 
To liberals the song “Baby it’s cold outside” is offensive because it gives off a rape vibe but “Back that ass up” by Juvenile is totally fine. **Facepalm**

7a3ddc986fb4a393e565286d1ffcfc2d.jpg
 
I'm thinking that perhaps I bailed on that show too soon.

Yeah you should definitely pick it back up. There is a Wade Boggs episode that is particularly hilarious
 
Back
Top Bottom